Chalmers C8

Why do thoeries need to be seen as structures?

• historical study reveals that the evolution and progress of major sciences exhibit a structure that is not captured by the inductivist and falsificationist accounts

• Concepts and statements will be as precise and informative as the theory in whose language they are formed

How does science progresses according to Kuhn?

pre-science → normal science → crisis → revolution → new normal science → new crisis.

The activity eventually becomes structured and directed when a single paradigm becomes adhered to by a scientific community

What does Kuhn say about the paradigms?

Kuhn recognises that all paradigms will contain some anomalies and rejects falsificationism; he believes that normal scientists must be uncritical of the paradigm in which they work. Pre-science is characterised by total disagreement. 

Kuhn argues that some work of the paradigm will violate the characterisation. Much of the normal scinetist’s knowledge will be tacit. Still scientists need to articulate the presuppositions involved in the paradigm when it is threatened by a rival.

When is there a crisis/gestalt switch?

An anomaly will be regarded as serious as if it is seen as striking at the very fundamentals of a paradigm and resists attempts by the members of the normal scientific community to remove it. 

The gestalt switch/religious conversion will not be based on purely logical argument that demonstrates the superiority of one paradigm over another and that thereby complex a rational scientist to make the change

• variety of factor that are involved in a scientist’s judgement

• proponent of rival paradigms will subscribe to different sets of standards and metaphysical principles  

→ the aim of arguments and discussions between supporters of rival paradigms should be persuasion rather than compulsion

What makes KUhn perspective meaningful>

When scientists dont question the legitimiacy of their paradigm, they can do detailed work. It contributes to

• abrstract things

• scientific revolutions

What is criticism on Kuhns idea?

Criticism is posed on the idea that it is unclear when science is progressing when a paradigm is replaced through revolution. He says no argument can be logically or even probabilistically compelling.

Is Kuhn talking about subjective knowledge or objective knowledge?

Subjective knowledge is not publicly testable and debatable whereas objective knowledge is. 

Kuhn’s talk of gestalt switches is subjective knowledge, whereas all the other forms are objective (e.g. anomalies and puzzle-solving tradition with a paradigm).